Editorial - Juvenile court isn't ‘being soft on crime'

Tuesday

May 29, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Few people believe that school-age teens possess the judgment to vote or to drink alcohol, yet we allow children as young as 13 – and in some cases, younger – to be tried as adults in some cases. A bill introduced with bipartisan support in the N.C. House and Senate would change how we treat our youngest offenders. The Honorables should approve it.North Carolina is one of only two states that automatically try 16-year-olds as adults in all criminal cases. New York is the other.According to Raise the Age, a coalition of court officials, advocacy groups, child development experts and legislators that supports trying those defendants as juveniles in most cases, mixing younger offenders with older, more experienced criminals, makes it more likely that those young inmates will leave prison as hardened criminals themselves. Statistics show that 16- and 17-year-olds tried in the adult courts are more likely to violate probation and more likely to become repeat offenders.That's a poor showing for our justice system. The youngest offenders are the ones with the most potential to change, with the proper guidance. The system won't rehabilitate all of them, but except for those who commit acts of extreme violence, they should be treated as the children they still are.The bill is set for a hearing before a House judiciary subcommittee this morning and has a good chance of passing with a favorable recommendation. It has the support of conservative lawmakers as well as progressives who have been pushing for decades to stop prosecuting minors as adults. The conservative John Locke Foundation offered its support last week for the bill, which has Republican and Democratic sponsors.If approved, 16- and 17-year-olds charged with misdemeanors – which represent about 80 percent of arrests in that age group – would be tried as juveniles. Felonies would still be prosecuted in Superior Court.This bill is a good start, but would be better if it included a provision allowing for greater flexibility with nonviolent felonies. Just as important, is the need to segregate younger offenders from hardened career criminals – and to keep the youngest juvenile delinquents separate from older teenagers who may already have been through the system a few times.Research has shown that a person's judgment and capacity for reason are still developing well beyond age 21. Our criminal justice system is supposed to have the dual purpose of punishing the guilty and attempting to rehabilitate them so that they do not commit new crimes. We're good at the punishment aspect, but have a poor track record on the latter.At the very least we should do whatever we can to steer young offenders onto the straight and narrow. The juvenile court system, despite its flaws, puts an emphasis on doing just that.Changing the system is more complex than passing a bill, and it will require an investment in the juvenile court system. Changes will be phased in to minimize the burden on the court system. But if Raise the Age is correct, the state ultimately could save money.More important, we could be saving troubled youth from a life of crime, and helping to push them into more productive lines of work.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.